Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is broadly recognised as having the potential to play a key role in meeting climate change targets, delivering low carbon heat and power, decarbonising industry and, more recently, its ability to facilitate the net removal of CO₂ from the atmosphere. However, despite this broad consensus and its technical maturity, CCS has not yet been deployed on a scale commensurate with the ambitions articulated a decade ago. Thus, in this paper we review the current state-of-the-art of CO₂ capture, transport, utilisation and storage from a multi-scale perspective, moving from the global to molecular scales. In light of the COP21 commitments to limit warming to less than 2 °C, we extend the remit of this study to include the key negative emissions technologies (NETs) of bioenergy with CCS (BECCS), and direct air capture (DAC). Cognisant of the non-technical barriers to deploying CCS, we reflect on recent experience from the UK's CCS commercialisation programme and consider the commercial and political barriers to the large-scale deployment of CCS. In all areas, we focus on identifying and clearly articulating the key research challenges that could usefully be addressed in the coming decade.

Significance: Carbon dioxide (CO ₂ ) drives climate change when released to the atmosphere. Alternatively, CO ₂ could be captured and utilized as carbon source for chemicals. Here, we provide a global assessment of the technical climate change mitigation potential of carbon capture and utilization (CCU) in the chemical industry. We develop an engineering-level model of the global chemical industry representing 75% of current greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The model allows us to analyze the potential disruptive changes through large-scale CO ₂ utilization and resulting emission reductions. Our study shows that CCU has the technical potential to lead to a carbon-neutral chemical industry and decouple chemical production from fossil resources. This transition, however, would cause largely increased mass flows and demand for low-carbon electricity.

Reducing net emission: The great majority of plastics in current use are sourced from fossil fuels, with additional fossil fuels combusted to power their manufacture. Substantial research is focused on finding more sustainable building blocks for next-generation polymers. Meys et al . report a series of life cycle analyses suggesting that even the current varieties of commercial monomers could potentially be manufactured and polymerized with no net greenhouse gas emissions. The cycle relies on combining recycling of plastic waste with chemical reduction of carbon dioxide captured from incineration or derived from biomass. —JSY

A large variety of energy storage systems are currently investigated for using surplus power from intermittent renewable energy sources. Typically, these energy storage systems are compared based on their Power-to-Power reconversion efficiency. Such a comparison, however, is inappropriate for energy storage systems not providing electric power as output. We therefore present a systematic environmental comparison of energy storage systems providing different products. As potential products, we consider the reconversion to power but also mobility, heat, fuels and chemical feedstock. Using life cycle assessment, we determine the environmental impacts avoided by using 1 MW h of surplus electricity in the energy storage systems instead of producing the same product in a conventional process. Based on data for several countries including the United States, Brazil, Japan, Germany and the United Kingdom, our analysis determines the highest reduction of global warming and fossil depletion impact for using surplus power in heat pumps with hot water storage and battery electric vehicles. Third highest environmental benefits are achieved by electrical energy storage systems (pumped hydro storage, compressed air energy storage and redox flow batteries). Environmental benefits are also obtained if surplus power is used to produce hydrogen but the benefits are lower. Our environmental assessment of energy storage systems is complemented by determination of CO₂ mitigation costs. The lowest CO₂ mitigation costs are achieved by electrical energy storage systems.